Saturday, November 5, 2016

Religion, Liberty and Justice at Home and Abroad

By Rudy
Barnes, Jr.

Equal Justice under law is engraved on
the U.S. Supreme Court building, and it captures the spirit of our standards of
legitimacy (what is right) and justice.
Religions are a primary source of the legal and moral standards of
legitimacy that define justice. Ancient Judaism
and Islam defined their standards of legitimacy and justice by divine law,
while Jesus summarized them in the moral imperative to love God and neighbor in
the greatest commandment.

In
the 18th century the Enlightenment transformed religion and politics
in the West with libertarian concepts of justice that included democracy, human
rights and the secular rule of law. In
the Islamic East, however, Islamic Law (shari’a) continued to prevail with apostasy
and blasphemy laws that prohibit the freedoms of religion and speech, and with other
discriminatory laws that deny women and non-Muslims equal protection of the
law.

Since
the early 20th century, human rights that begin with the freedoms of
religion and speech have been stated priorities of U.S. foreign policy. But in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Pakistan
and Turkey shari’a has prevented enforcement of those fundamental human rights,
and their violation has been ignored to avoid political conflict with those
allied nations.

Where
shari’a asserts its supremacy over human rights and secular law, it denies justice
to minorities and produces a tyranny of the majority. Promoting the freedoms of religion and speech
along with equal justice under law for women and non-Muslims not only promotes justice
in Islamic nations, but it also undermines the legitimacy of authoritarian
leaders and radical Islamist terrorists who depend upon oppressive forms of
shari’a to stifle their opposition.

That
pragmatic point seems lost on President Obama.
He has rewarded El Sissi’s oppressive military regime in Egypt with U.S.
aid and assistance, failed to criticize Erdogan’s repressive policies in
Turkey, failed to criticize Saudi Arabia for propagating an extremist form of
Islamic fundamentalism (Wahhabism) worldwide, and failed to criticize Islamic nations
that use apostasy and blasphemy laws to deny the freedoms of religion and
speech.

This
hypocrisy reflects shortsighted political expediency that has taken precedence
over U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East and Africa. When the U.S. does not condemn the violation
of human rights and discrimination against women and non-Muslims in Islamic
nations, it promotes authoritarian regimes and radical Islamist terrorism whose
legitimacy depends on denying political freedom to those who would oppose them.

Shari’a
functions much like a constitution in Islamic nations and defines standards of legitimacy
and justice differently than do constitutions in libertarian democracies. There can be no real justice when shari’a denies
fundamental human rights, and U.S. security assistance should not be provided to
any nation that denies libertarian human rights. That standard would mean no U.S. aid for those
nations that enforce apostasy or blasphemy laws.

The
conflict between ancient religious laws and libertarian concepts of justice is not
unique to Islam. Before the
Enlightenment, Judaism and Christianity enforced heresy and blasphemy laws. Since then fundamental human rights have been
protected by the constitutions of libertarian democracies and international law
under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The 1990 Cairo Declaration, however, takes
exception to the ICCPR, providing that shari’a is the last word on human rights
and justice in Islamic cultures.

But
that’s not the end of the story. Standards
of legitimacy, liberty and justice are dynamic, evidenced by the wide diversity
of opinion among Islamic scholars on those standards. Progressive Muslims promote interpretations of
shari’a that are consistent with libertarian concepts of human rights and
justice, while fundamentalist Muslims, like their Jewish and Christian counterparts,
resist any change to their ancient religious doctrines and laws.

The greatest commandment to love God and
our neighbors as we love ourselves is a
common word of faith for Jews, Christians and Muslims alike. The Apostle Paul cited that commandment as a
precedent for justice in all religions when he asserted that Jewish Law was fulfilled
by the moral imperative to love our neighbors as ourselves (see Romans
13:8-10). While human rights were
unknown in Paul’s ancient times, his precedent for justice requires that today we
share the liberty we love for ourselves with our neighbors at home and abroad.